4th Amendment Down

[refugepsa91]

Cleaned up slightly. Endeavor not to call names please folks....and for the record..."being delibrately provactaive" and "unapologetic" isn't going to stand either...

If anyone has a question...don't hesitate to pm me and I will gladly talk with you....

Love and Blessings,

Angel

[Guest yod]

you have all missed the point. Whine all you want...nothing is going to change or stop it. Dhimmicrat or Republi-con....it goes on. Face reality. The world is a different place since 911. Government intrusion will continue at least until the current war is over.

If the war goes much longer, it will be irreversable. If it ends within the next 4 or 5 years, these intrusions could be rescinded.

According to your definition Buck, there should be martial law immediately because the war was declared by osama in 1996 with America as the battleground. He openly proclaims an "American Hiroshima" is Al Quida's goal with at least 4 million Americans killed. And for the umpteenth time....no matter what you've heard Iraq was never the goal. It has always been Iran...Iraq gave us a good excuse to surround them in hopes of containing the threat.

And who cares about their ideology? Islamic terrorism will only be defeated by making them pay a higher price than they want to pay. They will not be won to an ideology whereby all people have freedom of religion and speech so frankly, I don't give a rip what they think. A good terrorist is a dead one.

When they are all gone the government will have no excuse to monitor every citizen. We should wipe them out immediately, if not sooner.

[buckthesystem]

you have all missed the point. Whine all you want...nothing is going to change or stop it. Dhimmicrat or Republi-con....it goes on. Face reality. The world is a different place since 911. Government intrusion will continue at least until the current war is over.

If the war goes much longer, it will be irreversable. If it ends within the next 4 or 5 years, these intrusions could be rescinded.

According to your definition Buck, there should be martial law immediately because the war was declared by osama in 1996 with America as the battleground. He openly proclaims an "American Hiroshima" is Al Quida's goal with at least 4 million Americans killed. And for the umpteenth time....no matter what you've heard Iraq was never the goal. It has always been Iran...Iraq gave us a good excuse to surround them in hopes of containing the threat.

And who cares about their ideology? Islamic terrorism will only be defeated by making them pay a higher price than they want to pay. They will not be won to an ideology whereby all people have freedom of religion and speech so frankly, I don't give a rip what they think. A good terrorist is a dead one.

. We should wipe them out immediately, if not sooner.

Yod I fear you seem to be the one who is "missing the point". The point is that no matter what spin and lies people hear trying to convince them "Osama said in 1996 .............. therefore a state of war exists and that means that we we will have to 'protect' you by cancelling all your hard-won civil liberties and tearing up the constitution", the "war" and the idea that this will "protect" you is somebody's fantasy. America has always been thought of as quite a few notches above the rest of the world in the fact that it didn't have an oppressive government, it had a constitution that meant more than the paper it was written on, the people kept their government in check and didn't ever let it over-ride these things.

To believe everything you are told and embrace the philosophy that "it is necessary to give up the most basic rights to be 'safe'" is saying that America may as well be "in the same boat" as any other country in the world, and there is nothing "free" about the "land of the free".

Destroying the fourth Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with "terrorism", how could it? And the government having an excuse to monitor every citizen also has nothing at all to do with "terrorism" - how could that either.

If you seriously believe "When they are all gone the government will have no excuse to monitor every citizen" you have been seriously duped. If the US government is allowed to get away with this, rights will never be returned to the American citizen. You must know this.

[Burning_Ember]

Yod I fear you seem to be the one who is "missing the point". The point is that no matter what spin and lies people hear trying to convince them "Osama said in 1996 .............. therefore a state of war exists and that means that we we will have to 'protect' you by cancelling all your hard-won civil liberties and tearing up the constitution", the "war" and the idea that this will "protect" you is somebody's fantasy. America has always been thought of as quite a few notches above the rest of the world in the fact that it didn't have an oppressive government, it had a constitution that meant more than the paper it was written on, the people kept their government in check and didn't ever let it over-ride these things.

To believe everything you are told and embrace the philosophy that "it is necessary to give up the most basic rights to be 'safe'" is saying that America may as well be "in the same boat" as any other country in the world, and there is nothing "free" about the "land of the free".

Destroying the fourth Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with "terrorism", how could it? And the government having an excuse to monitor every citizen also has nothing at all to do with "terrorism" - how could that either.

If you seriously believe "When they are all gone the government will have no excuse to monitor every citizen" you have been seriously duped. If the US government is allowed to get away with this, rights will never be returned to the American citizen. You must know this.

[georgesbluegirl]

The solution is to win the war, eliminate the terrorist threat, and completely obliterate those who are seeking to kill us by the millions.

Okay here's my problem (well, one of them). Although the White House has been trying to spin the rhetoric around of late, we're currently engaged in what most people - especially most people here - call the "War on Terror." But what is a war on terror? How can you win a war on an emotion, something basically insurmountable? Fine, call it a war on terrorism. But terrorism has pretty much always existed, across cultures and nations. We just haven't always called it that. So maybe we refer to this as the battle against militant Islamist terrorism. How do we win that "war" in the end? Do we just wipe out every single person who sympathizes with the radical Islamist cause? Isn't that just as self-defeating? If we keep doing what we've been doing - not necessarily in Afghanistan, but certainly with Iraq - all we do is create more and more cynical, anti-Western, radicalized Muslims. Do we not stop until the entirety of the Middle East is against us? Do we then level the entire region with bombs? That's pretty much where it carries out - down the warpath (and honestly I don't think even that would end things).

Putting aside my beliefs about what we should be doing in terms of foreign policy right now, the point that I am trying to make is that what we are looking at is an irritatingly undefined conflict, a prolonged war of vagaries. So in the name of keeping us "terror free," we just put our freedoms (incidentally, the same freedoms that we're supposed to be benevolently bestowing upon beleagured, recently-liberated nations) to the side, indefinitely?

I don't think so.